Illinois Supreme Court· 9/20/2007

Iseberg v. Gross

Citations

879 N.E.2d 278
227 Ill. 2d 78
316 Ill. Dec. 211
2007 Ill. LEXIS 1160

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

stating that, in the absence of special relationship, there is no affirmative duty to protect another from harm
declining to abandon the special relationship doctrine in favor of an affirmative duty to prevent reasonably foreseeable injuries
declining to abandon the special relationship doctrine in favor of an affirmative duty to prevent reasonably foreseeable injuries
\Changing social conditions lead constantly to the recognition of new duties.\
“We can find no case in which this court has recognized an affirmative duty, based on consideration of the four factors ... in the absence of a special relationship.”
\The existence of one of these four 'special relationships' has typically been the basis for imposing an affirmative duty to act where one would not ordinarily exist.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Burke

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

58 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Iseberg v. Gross

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.